Abstract
Abstract Broader impacts (BI) policies generate debate on the purpose of science, measuring the impact of research, and is an important topic for the science policy community. However, BI policies often fail to determine if R&D funding helps marginalized communities. This paper introduces a new framework, the Inclusion-Immediacy Criterion, that assesses who benefits from research impacts as divided into three groups: (1) advantaged groups; (2) the general population; and (3) marginalized groups. The study analyzes National Science Foundation (NSF) project outcome reports and finds that advantaged groups are the most likely to benefit from NSF-funded research. The study also shows that certain areas of NSF research, such as Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences, more efficiently generate impacts for marginalized groups compared to other directorates. This paper further argues that persistent inequalities in BIs limit the potential of R&D to increase prosperity and well-being, two of NSF’s mandated goals.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
